Horse training is a complex art, and the methods employed have long been a subject of debate among professionals. While traditional techniques often rely on established principles of pressure and release, the advent of positive reinforcement methods, such as clicker training, has introduced new paradigms. This article explores the nuances of clicker training, contrasting it with traditional approaches, and examines the potential benefits and drawbacks of each. It aims to provide a balanced perspective, drawing from expert opinions and practical experiences.
Understanding the Core of Training Methods
The debate surrounding horse training methods often centers on the use of rewards and the potential for unintended consequences. Traditional methods, like those espoused by Monty Roberts, emphasize a deep understanding of equine behavior and communication, often utilizing a system of pressure and release to guide the horse. This approach focuses on building a relationship based on mutual respect and clear communication, where the trainer learns to “speak the horse’s language.”
Clicker training, on the other hand, is a form of positive reinforcement that uses a distinct sound—the click—to mark a desired behavior. This click is then immediately followed by a reward, typically a food treat. The intention is to create a clear association between the behavior, the marker signal, and the reward, thereby encouraging the horse to repeat the desired action.
The Controversial Link Between Clicker Training and Biting
A significant point of contention in the discussion of clicker training, particularly for horse training, is its potential association with aggressive behaviors like biting. Monty Roberts, a prominent figure in natural horsemanship, has voiced strong reservations about clicker training when it involves food rewards being offered directly from the human body. He posits that this practice can inadvertently teach horses to associate humans with food, leading them to become overly familiar and potentially aggressive, stalking or even charging their handlers with open mouths and pinned ears.
Roberts recounts an experience at Equine Affaire where he worked with a four-year-old gelding exhibiting extreme biting aggression. The owner revealed that the horse had been trained using clicker training with food rewards. While Roberts was able to improve the horse’s attitude in a short session, he maintained his opinion that offering food directly from the hand in conjunction with clicker training could produce biting horses. He advised the owner to cease this practice, though he acknowledged that the clicker itself, as an audible marker signal, was not problematic and could be a useful part of any training system.
Bridging the Divide: A Collaborative Exploration
Despite initial reservations, Monty Roberts engaged in a valuable exchange with professional clicker trainers Kim Cassidy and Linda Pearson. This collaboration, spanning three days at Flag Is Up Farms, provided an opportunity to work with various types of horses—raw, remedial, and well-trained. The experience aimed to foster a deeper understanding of both methodologies.
Kim Cassidy, a professional horse trainer who utilizes clicker training, initially approached Roberts after expressing dissatisfaction with some of his public statements regarding hand-feeding and clicker training. Following an exchange of emails, she was invited to his farm, bringing along Linda Pearson, an experienced trainer from the UK who had integrated Roberts’ work with her clicker training practices.
Day One: Initial Challenges and Discouragement
The initial day of the collaboration presented challenges. Roberts allowed Cassidy and Pearson to work with a young horse exhibiting biting behavior, which had been trained using clicker methods. Cassidy noted that Roberts did not seem pleased by the absence of negative consequences when the horse attempted to “mug” her. They also worked with a nervous mustang filly, experiencing limited success. Both trainers felt discouraged, perceiving a lack of progress and that their methods were not showcased favorably compared to Roberts’ results.
Day Two: Observations and Agreements
The second day saw a shift in approach and understanding. Roberts took over the training of the colt, using his Dually® halter to correct unwanted behaviors when the horse invaded his space. Both Cassidy and Pearson agreed that this horse had likely been poorly trained, with indiscriminate hand-feeding contributing to the problem, a practice they themselves were against.
They then worked with the nervous mustang filly, who was experiencing trailer loading issues. Linda Pearson successfully performed a Join-Up® with the filly, demonstrating the benefit of an audible marker signal using clicker training without treats. Roberts then spent time getting the filly comfortable with the trailer. Cassidy observed Roberts’ calm and unagitated demeanor, noting his ability to remain detached from the horse’s “drama”—a characteristic she recognized in skilled trainers. She also noted the filly’s apparent joy and comfort after Roberts’ training, describing it as the horse finally having her “language” understood.
Cassidy then worked with a Thoroughbred gelding that refused to load onto a trailer without heavy tranquilization. Roberts firmly stated his policy against using drugs in training. Cassidy performed her first Join-Up® with the gelding, guided by Roberts, and then successfully used the Dually halter to move the horse’s feet on request, pairing a click with a rub as a reward. She felt this demonstrated her understanding of pairing the click with a positive reinforcement other than food, which Roberts could appreciate.
Day Three: Mutual Learning and Appreciation
On the third day, the trainers switched animals. Cassidy did a Join-Up® with the mustang filly, and Pearson worked with the Thoroughbred gelding, successfully using the click and rub marker. They then worked with two wild mustangs, which quickly became cooperative. Cassidy was deeply moved by the experience, noting the unique, “pure” nature of mustangs and how they gave their trust completely once it was earned. She observed Roberts’ satisfaction in witnessing their enjoyment and his evident passion for training.
Cassidy and Pearson acknowledged that while they may not have changed Roberts’ fundamental views on clicker training, they had succeeded in helping him distinguish between the clicker itself and the problematic practice of indiscriminate hand-feeding. They also hoped to have initiated an ongoing exchange of ideas between the two communities. Both trainers expressed their admiration for Roberts, recognizing his deep love for horses and his ability to convey respect rather than fear. They concluded that Roberts had indeed brought a new understanding to the horse world.
Key Takeaways and Best Practices
The collaborative experience highlighted several crucial points for effective horse training, regardless of the specific methodology:
- Clear Communication: Whether through pressure-and-release or clicker-and-reward, clear and consistent communication is paramount.
- Understanding Equine Behavior: A deep understanding of a horse’s natural behaviors, motivations, and emotional states is essential for building trust and achieving desired outcomes.
- Avoiding Indiscriminate Hand-Feeding: Offering food rewards directly from the hand can create problematic associations and should be approached with caution, if not avoided altogether.
- The Power of the Audible Marker: The clicker, as an audible marker signal, can be a valuable tool for clearly indicating desired behavior, irrespective of the reward system used.
- Respect Over Fear: True training is built on a foundation of mutual respect, not on instilling fear in the animal.
- Professional Expertise: The successful application of any training method often depends on the skill and experience of the trainer. Poorly executed training, regardless of the system, can lead to negative outcomes.
Ultimately, both clicker training and traditional methods, when applied with expertise, care, and a deep understanding of equine psychology, can be effective. The key lies in the trainer’s ability to adapt their approach, prioritize the horse’s well-being, and foster a relationship built on trust and clear communication.
